Chapter VII: Part 7

The need of water to drive Arkwright's machinery, and its value for working other machinery, caused a strong decentralizing tendency to show itself in the cotton industry at this time, but more particularly in the twist-spinning branch. Ultimately the steam-engine (first used in the cotton industry in 1785) drew all branches of the industry into the towns, where the advantages of their juxtaposition--i.e. the external economies of centralization--could be enjoyed. Out of the crowding of the mills in one locality sprang the business specialism which has continued up to the present day. Here it will not be out of place to notice the appearance of the new power, electricity, in the cotton industry, the extension of which may involve striking economic changes. The first electric-driven spinning-mill in Lancashire, that of the "Acme" Spinning Company at Pendlebury, the work of which is confined to the ring-frame, was opened in 1905. Power is obtained from the stations of the Lancashire Power Company at Outwood near Radcliffe, some 5 m. distant.

The chief principle of the water-frame was the drawing out of the yarn to the required degree of tenuity by sets of gripping rollers revolving at different speeds. This principle is still applied universally. Twist was given by a "flyer" revolving round the bobbin upon which the yarn was being wound; the spinning so effected was known as throstle-spinning. The plan is still common in the subsidiary processes of the cotton industry, but for spinning itself the ring-frame, which appears to have been invented simultaneously in England and the United States (the first American patent is dated 1828), is rapidly supplanting the throstle-frame,[27] though the "ooziness" of mule yarn has not yet been successfully imitated by ring-frame yarn. The great invention relating to weft-spinning was the jenny, introduced by James Hargreaves probably about 1764, and first tried in a factory four years later.[28] Hargreaves unfortunately was unable to maintain his patent, because he had sold jennies before applying for protection. Crompton's mule, which combined the principles of the rollers and the jenny, was perfected about 1779. Both jennies and mules were known as "wheels," because they were worked in part by the turning of a wheel. As they could be set in motion without using much power, being light when of moderate size, for a long time they were worked entirely by hand or partially with the aid of horses or water. The first jenny- and mule-factories were small for this reason, and also because skill in the operative was a matter of fundamental importance,[29] as it was not in twist-spinning on the water-frame. The size of the typical weft-spinning mill suddenly increased after the scope for the application of power was enlarged by the use of the self-actor mule, invented in 1825 by Richard Roberts, of the firm of Sharp, Roberts & Co., machinists, of Manchester. In 1830 Roberts improved his invention and brought out the complete self-actor. Self-actors had been put forward by others besides Roberts--for instance by William Strutt, F.R.S. (son of Arkwright's partner), before 1790; William Kelly, formerly of Lanark mills, in 1792; William Eaton of Wiln in Derbyshire; Peter Ewart of Manchester; de Jongh of Warrington; Buchanan, of Catrine works, Scotland; Knowles of Manchester; and Dr Brewster of America[30]--but none had succeeded. And Roberts's machines did not immediately win popularity. For a long time the winding done by them was defective, and they suffered from other imperfections. Broadly speaking, until the American Civil War the number of hand-mules in use remained high. It was for the fine "counts" in particular that many employers preferred them.[31] About the end of the 'sixties, however, and in the early 'seventies, great improvements were effected in machinery, partly under the stimulus of a desire to elevate its fitness for dealing with short-staple cotton, and it became evident that hand-mules were doomed. Here we may suitably refer to the scutching machine for opening and cleaning cotton, invented by Mr Snodgrass of Glasgow in 1797, and introduced by Kennedy[32] to Manchester in 1808 or 1809; the cylinder carder invented by Lewis Paul and improved by Arkwright; and the lap-machine first constructed by Arkwright's son.

Weaving machinery.

We now transfer our attention to that accumulation of improvements in manufacturing (as weaving is technically termed) which, taken in conjunction with the inventions already described, presaged the large factory system which covers Lancashire to-day. Gradually, for many years, the loom had been gathering complexities, though no fundamental alteration was introduced into its structure until 1738, when John Kay of Bury excited the wrath of his fellow-weavers by designing and employing the device of the fly-shuttle. For some unfathomable reason--for the opposition of the weavers hardly explains it, though they expressed their views forcibly and acted upon them violently--this invention was not much applied in the cotton industry until about a quarter of a century after its appearance. The plan was merely to substitute for human hands hammers at the ends of a lengthened lathe along which the shuttle ran, the hammers being set in motion by the jerking of a stick (the picking peg) to which they were attached by strings. The output of a weaver was enormously increased in consequence. In 1760 John Kay's son Robert added the drop-box, by the use of which many different kinds of weft could be worked into the same fabric without difficulty. It was in fact a partitioned lift, any partition of which could be brought to a level with the lathe and made for the time continuous with it. The drop-box usefully supplemented the "draw-boy," or "draught-boy," which provided for the raising of warps in groups, and thereby enabled figured goods to be produced. The "draw-boy" had been well known in the industry for a long time; in 1687 a Joseph Mason patented an invention for avoiding the expense of an assistant to work it,[33] but there is no evidence to show that his invention was of practical value. Looms with "draw-boys" affixed, which could sometimes be worked by the weavers themselves, later became common under the name of harness-looms, which have since been supplanted by Jacquard looms, wherein the pattern is picked out mechanically.

The principle of the fly-shuttle was a first step towards the complete mechanizing of the action required for working a loom. The second step was the power-loom, the initial effort to design which was created by the tardiness of weaving as contrasted with the rapidity of spinning by power. After the general adoption of the jenny, supplies of yarn outran the productive powers of the agencies that existed for converting them into fabrics, and as a consequence, it would seem, some yarn was directed into exports which might have been utilized for the manufacture of cloth for export had the loom been more productive. The agitation for the export tax on yarn at the end of the 18th, and in the first years of the 19th century, is therefore comprehensible, but there was no foundation for some of the allegations by which it was supported. For a large proportion of the exported yarn, fabrics could not have been substituted, since the former was required to feed the hand-looms in continental homes and domestic workshops, against much of the product of which there was no chance of competing. The hand-loom was securely linked to the home of the peasant, and though he would buy yarn to feed his loom he would not buy cloth and break it up.[34]

Cartwright's loom was not the first design adapted for weaving by power. A highly rudimentary and perfectly futile self-actor weaving machine, which would have been adapted for power-working had it been capable of working at all, had been invented by a M. de Gennes: a description of it, extracted from the _Journal de scavans_, appeared in the _Philosophical Transactions_ for July and August 1678, and again in the _Gentleman's Magazine_ in 1751 (vol. xxi. pp. 391-392). It consisted of mechanical hands, as it were, that shot in and out of the warp and exchanged the shuttle.[35] Another idea, which however proved fruitful, was that of grinding the shuttle through the warps by the agency of cog-wheels working at each end upon teeth affixed to the upper side of the shuttle. Though shuttles could not in this fashion be set in rapid movement, the machine turned out to be economical for the production of ribbons and tapes, because many pieces could be woven by it at once. These contrivances were known as swivel-looms, and in 1724 Stukeley in his _Itinerarium curiosum_ wrote that the people of Manchester have "looms that work twenty-four laces at a time, which was stolen from the Dutch." Ogden says also that they were set up in imitation of Dutch machines by Dutch mechanics invited over for the purpose. Another interesting passage relating to the swivel-looms will be found in the rules of the Manchester small-ware weavers dated 1756, where the complaint is made that the masters have acquired by the employment of "engine or Dutch looms such large and opulent fortunes as hath enabled them to vie with some of the best gentlemen of the country," and it is alleged that these machines, which wove twelve or fourteen pieces at once, "were in use in Manchester thirty years ago."[36] One power-factory at least was devoted to them as early as 1760, namely that of a Mr Gartside at Manchester, where water-power was applied, but the enterprise failed.[37] Cartwright's invention was probably perfected in its first form about 1787, but many corrections, improvements and additions had to be effected before it became an unqualified success. Cartwright's original idea was elaborated by numerous followers, and supplementary ideas were needed to make the system complete. Of the latter the most important were those due to William Radcliffe, and an ingenious mechanic who worked with him, Thomas Johnson, which were patented in 1803 and 1804. They related to the dressing of the warp before it was placed in the loom, and for the mechanical taking up of the cloth and drawing forward of the warp, so that the loom had not to be stopped for the cloth to be moved on and the warp brought within play of the shuttle to be sized. Looms fitted with the latter of these devices were known as "dandy" looms. The looms that followed need not be described here, nor need we concern ourselves with the degree in which some were imitations of others. It is of interest to note, however, in view of recent developments, that one of Cartwright's patents included a warp-stop motion, though it was never tried practically so far as the writer is aware. Looms with warp-stop motions are now common in the United States, as are also automatic looms, but both are still the exception in Lancashire for reasons that will be sketched later.

Power-looms won their way only very gradually. Cartwright and others lost fortunes in trying to make them pay, but the former was compensated by a grant of L10,000 from government. In 1813 there were 2400 only in the whole of the United Kingdom; in 1820 there were 14,000, beside some 240,000 hand-looms; in 1829, 55,500; in 1833, 100,000; and in 1870, 440,700.[38] To-day there are about 700,000 in the cotton industry. The beginning, and the final consequences, of the competitive pressure of the power-looms may be read in the reports of official inquiries and in Rowbotham's diary.[39] It was upon the fine work that the hand-loom weavers retained their last hold. In 1829 John Kennedy wrote in his paper to the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society on "The Rise and Progress of the Cotton Trade," "It is found ... that one person cannot attend upon more than two power-looms, and it is still problematical [even in 1829, observe] whether the saving of labour counterbalances the expense of power and machinery and the disadvantage of being obliged to keep an establishment of power-looms constantly at work." It was not easy to obtain a sufficiency of good hands for the power-looms, because the operatives, who had acquired their habits under the domestic system, hated factory life. This, in conjunction with the ease with which the art of coarse weaving could be acquired and the cheapness of rough looms, helps to explain the wretched straits into which the hand-loom weavers were driven.

[Sidenote: Growth.]

Improvements in machinery, which ultimately affected every process from cleaning the cotton to finishing the fabric, and the application of water and steam-power, so lowered the cost of production as to render Lancashire the cotton factory of the world. Figures are quoted in the table to show the rate of growth in different periods of England's imports and exports as regards the raw material and products of this industry. It is important to remember when reading the last 6 columns that the value of money was the same in 1831-1835, 1851-1855 and 1876-1880: the sums of Sauerbeck's index numbers for these periods were 454, 451 and 444 respectively. In the last two periods there were considerable depressions in prices. If prices had remained constant, in the periods 1891-1895 and 1896-1900 the figures of exports would have been L90 millions and L91 millions respectively. The growth in trade has been partly occasioned by the enormous increase in the volume of cotton goods consumed all over the world, which in turn has been due to (1) the growth of population, (2) the increase in productive efficiency and well-being, and (3) the substitution of cotton fabrics for woollen and linen fabrics. The rate of growth between the periods 1771-1781 and 1781-1791 (which is not shown in the above table) was particularly remarkable, and reached as high a figure (when measured by importations of weight of cotton) as 320%.

+---------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------------+---------------------------+
| | | | Exports of Cotton Yarns |Imports of Cotton Yarns and|
| | | |and Manufactures, Million L. | Manufactures, Million L |
| | Imports of | Raw Cotton | | |
| Year. | Raw Cotton, |re-exported, +------+-------------+--------+------+-------------+------+
| | Million lb. | Million lb. | | | | |Manufactures.| |
| | | |Yarns.|Manufactures.| Total. |Yarns.| (excluding |Total.|
| | | | | | | | Lace.) | |
+---------+-------------+-------------+------+-------------+--------+------+-------------+------+
|1700-1705| 1.17 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
|1771-1775| 4.76 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
|1785-1789| .. | .. | .. | .. | 1.07* | .. | .. | .. |
|1791-1795| 26.00 | .. | .. | .. | 2.09* | .. | .. | .. |
|1816-1820| 139.00 | 10.00 | 2.5 | 13.8 | 16.30 | .. | .. | .. |
|1831-1835| 313.00 | 23.00 | 4.8 | 14.2 | 19.00 | .. | .. | .. |
|1851-1855| 872.00 | 124.00 | 6.8 | 24.9 | 31.70 | .. | .. | .. |
|1876-1880| 1456.00 | 180.00 | 12.4 | 56.1 | 68.30 | .. | 2.29 | 2.29 |
|1891-1895| 1746.00 | 217.00 | 9.7 | 56.6 | 66.30 | .42 | 2.78 | 3.20 |
|1896-1900| 1798.00 | 223.00 | 8.9 | 58.2 | 67.10 | .26 | 4.27 | 4.53 |
|1901-1905| 1920.00 | 265.00 | 8.4 | 70.7 | 79.10 | .22 | 5.10 | 5.32 |
+---------+-------------+-------------+------+-------------+--------+------+-------------+------+
* Official values.

Differentiation and Integration.

Nothing is more interesting in the cotton industry than the processes of differentiation and integration that have taken place from time to time. Weaving and spinning had been to a large extent united in the industry in its earliest form, in that both were frequently conducted beneath the same roof. With mechanical improvements in spinning, that branch of the industry became a separate business, and a substantial section of it was brought under the factory regime. Weaving continued to be performed in cottages or in hand-loom sheds where no spinning at all was attempted. Cartwright's invention carried weaving back to spinning, because both operations then needed power, and the trouble of marketing yarn was largely spared by the reunion. Mr W. R. Grey stated in 1833 to the committee of the House of Commons on manufactures, commerce and shipping, that he knew of no single person then building a spinning mill who was not attaching to it a power-loom factory. Some years later the weaving-shed split away from spinning, partly no doubt because of the economies of industrial specialism, partly because of commercial developments, to be described later, which rendered dissociation less hazardous than it had been, and partly because, in consequence of these developments, much manufacturing (as weaving is termed) was constituted a business strikingly dissimilar from spinning. The manufacturer runs more risks in laying by stocks than the spinner, because of the greater variety of his product and the more frequent changes that it undergoes. The former, therefore, must devote more time than the latter to keeping his order book and the productive power of his shed in close correspondence. The minute care of this kind that must be exercised in some classes of businesses explains why the small manufacturer still holds his own while the small spinner has been crushed out. It also explains to some extent the prevalence of joint-stock companies in spinning, and their comparative rarity in manufacturing. Here we should notice, perhaps, that the only combination of importance in the cotton industry proper (apart from calico-printing, bleaching, &c., and the manufacture of sewing-cotton) is the Fine Cotton Spinners and Doublers Association, founded in 1898, which is practically coextensive with fine spinning and doubling.

Localization of branches of the industry.

The specialism of the two main branches of the industry has been followed by the specialism of sub-branches and by the localization of specialized parts. Of the localization of certain sections of the cotton industry the late Mr Elijah Helm, who spoke with the authority of great local knowledge, has written as follows:--

"Spinning is largely concentrated in south Lancashire and in the
adjoining borderland of north Cheshire. But even within this area
there is further allocation. The finer and the very finest yarns are
spun in the neighbourhood of Bolton, and in or near Manchester, much
of this being used for the manufacture of sewing-thread; whilst other
descriptions, employed almost entirely for weaving, are produced in
Oldham and other towns. The weaving branches of the industry are
chiefly conducted in the northern half of Lancashire--most of it in
very large boroughs, as Blackburn, Burnley and Preston. Here, again,
there is a differentiation. Preston and Chorley produce the finer and
lighter fabrics; Blackburn, Darwen and Accrington, shirtings, dhooties
and other goods extensively shipped to India; whilst Nelson and Colne
make cloths woven from dyed yarn, and Bolton is distinguished for fine
quiltings and fancy cotton dress goods. These demarcations are not
absolutely observed, but they are sufficiently clear to give to each
town in the area covered by the cotton industry a distinctive place in
its general organization."[40]

The present local distribution of the cotton industry, as far as it is displayed statistically, is revealed in the table beneath, based upon the figures of spindles and looms given by Worrall and those of operatives in the census returns of 1901.

_Distribution of Cotton Operatives in Lancashire and the Vicinity
according to the Census Returns of 1901, together with the Number
of Spindles and Looms according to Worrall._

+------------------------+-------------+--------------+-------------+
| | No. of | No. | No. of |
| | Operatives. | Spindles (in | Looms. |
| | | Thousands). | |
+------------------------+-------------+--------------+-------------+
| Blackburn | 41,400 | 1,325 | 75,300 |
| Bolton | 29,800 | 5,035 | 20,100 |
| Oldham | 29,500 | 11,603 | 18,500 |
| Burnley | 27,900 | 687 | 79,300 |
| Manchester and Salford | 27,200 | 2,666 | 24,200* |
| Preston | 25,000 | 2,036 | 57,900 |
| Rochdale | 14,800 | 2,168 | 25,100 |
| Darwen | 12,500 | 336 | 28,700 |
| Nelson | 12,400 | 23 | 39,000 |
| Glossop** | | 968 | 15,400 |
| Bury | 10,700 | 818 | 22,200 |
| Stockport | 9,700 | 1,803 | 8,700 |
| Ashton-under-Lyne | 8,600 | 1,839 | 11,500 |
| Accrington | 8,300 | 417 | 36,400 |
| Colne | 7,300 | 140*** | 20,500 |
| Heywood | 7,300 | 869 | 6,400 |
| Stalybridge | 7,100 | 1,106 | 7,100 |
| Todmorden | 6,900 | 261 | 15,800 |
| Rawtenstall | 6,600 | 356 | 8,800 |
| Hyde | 6,500 | 553 | 7,900 |
| Chadderton | 6,400 | .. | .. |
| Haslingden | 6,100 | 148 | 12,000 |
| Bacup | 5,900 | 315 | 9,300 |
| Chorley | 5,900 | 547 | 17,900 |
| Farnworth, near Bolton | 5,700 | 738 | 10,600 |
| Leigh | 5,000 | 1,667 | 5,900 |
| Great Harwood | 4,900 | 72 | 12,400 |
| Middleton | 4,900 | 511 | 2,500 |
| Radcliffe | 4,800 | 157 | 8,900 |
+------------------------+-------------+--------------+-------------+
* Manchester only.
** The number of operatives in places in Derbyshire is not separately
specified.
*** Includes Foulridge with Colne.

Local markets have steadily lost in importance, partly owing to railway development, and it is now almost entirely in Manchester, on the Exchange, that dealing in yarns and fabrics takes place, and arrangements are made for export. The old Manchester Exchange, built in 1729, was taken down in 1792. A new Exchange, reared on a contiguous site, was opened in 1809, the first stone having been laid in 1806. The present building was erected in 1869. The great bulk of the exports of cotton goods proceeds from Liverpool, though London used to be the leading port, and Liverpool is still the chief English market for raw cotton, though now from one-sixth to one-eighth of English cotton supplies come up the Manchester Ship Canal.

Modern organization.

To understand the present organization of the cotton industry the reader must begin by mentally separating the commercial from the industrial functions. By the industrial functions are meant the arrangements of factors in production--choosing the most suitable machinery and hands, combining them in the most economical system, adapting the material used to this system, and keeping its working at the highest attainable level. The commercial functions consist in business which is not industrial. Analysis will show that there are, broadly speaking, two classes of commercial functions, namely (1) arranging for purchases and sales, and (2) the bearing of risks. The character of the former is apparent; it consists, as regards yarn, in discovering for each manufacturer which spinner makes the yarn which is best adapted to his requirements at the lowest cost, and in finding the most suitable customers for spinners. Risk-bearing is a commercial function of another kind. Every business that involves anticipation involves commercial risks. Thus the spinner who sells "forward" yarn, trusting that the price of cotton will not rise, is taking commercial risks, and so is the spinner who produces for stock, trusting that the class of yarn that he is making will continue in demand. These two instances will suffice to indicate what is meant by the carrying of commercial risks. To make the rest of our argument clear it will be well to write down formulae. Let A and B represent respectively the industrial operations of spinning and manufacturing. Let a and [alpha] represent respectively the commercial operations implied by the separate existence of A, that is, the buying of cotton and the selling of yarn; and let b and [Greek: beta] stand for the commercial operations associated with manufacturing, that is, the buying of yarn on the one hand, and the finding of customers and arranging for their purchases on the other hand. Then, A and B being distinct businesses, it is obvious that a range of schemes is possible of which the extremes may be roughly represented as follows:--

1. (aA[alpha]), (bB[beta])
2. (a), (A), ([alpha]b), (B), ([beta]),

where the brackets signify independent businesses. In case 1 each spinning business would be engaged with three problems, namely, (i.) buying material at the most favourable time, (ii.) producing at the lowest cost, and (iii.) finding buyers and selling at the highest price, including the arranging for the performance of the most remunerative work. But in case 2 the spinner would confine his attention to purely industrial matters, while the problem of finding cotton and arranging for the bearing of the risks as to future prices would rest with other persons, and the business of bringing spinner and manufacturer together and taking such risks as may be involved in ordering or disposing of yarn would be the function of yet others. In case 2 the commercial functions may be said to have differentiated completely from the main body of the industry. We need hardly give illustrations of the intermediate arrangements that formally lie between cases 1 and 2. A may retain commercial risks but find customers through intermediaries; in such an event there would be only partial differentiation of the commercial functions. The reader must be reminded also that for the sake of simplicity in the formulae we have overlooked different classes of A and of B, omitted bleaching, dyeing, printing and finishing, and drawn no distinction between the various classes of commercial work covered by one letter, for instance, selling in the home market and selling abroad.

It may help the reader to appreciate the organic growth of the cotton industry if we now run over the main lines of its evolution. Originally the industrial units were held together in one homogeneous commercial setting. The Manchester merchants bought cotton and warps, put them out to the weavers, and arranged for the finishing of the cloth and then for its sale, so far as they had not been acting on orders already received. There were variations of this system--for instance, in early years weavers sometimes bought their own yarns and cotton and sold their cloth--but just before the industrial revolution the arrangement sketched above was the most usual. Adverting to our formula, the Manchester merchants, we observe, performed functions a (in conjunction with importers), b (as regarded warps), and [beta]. Weft the weaver had to get spun by his family or outsiders. So, broadly speaking, there was one single commercial setting. After the appearance of the factory, the commercial work as between the water-twist mills, the mule-spinning businesses and the manufacturers, so far as the businesses were distinct, appears to have been done by the several producing firms concerned. It was not at once that ([alpha]b) began to differentiate, [beta] was already a separate business in the hands of Manchester merchants and the foreign houses who had established themselves in Manchester to direct the export trade. At the present time an advanced stage of commercial specialism has been reached. From the risks connected with the buying of cotton the spinner may if he please escape entirely.[41] Selling work is now done usually through intermediaries, but there is no one uniform rule as to the carrying of the commercial risks involved. This appears to be now to some extent a matter of arrangement between the persons concerned, but ultimately no doubt the risks will have to be borne by those most qualified by experience to bear them, namely, the commercial specialists. In no other trade in England, and in no other cotton industry abroad, has commercial specialism been carried so far as in the cotton trade of Lancashire. It is partly in consequence of the difference in this respect between the cotton industry in Lancashire and abroad that the separation of spinning from weaving is far more common in England than elsewhere. Elsewhere producers are deterred from specializing processes further in distinct businesses by the fear of the worries of buying and selling as between them.

The explanation of differences in respect of the degree of commercial specialism in different places and industries can be formulated only very generally. Time is required for the differentiation and localization to take place. The English cotton trade had not advanced very far in the "'thirties," if we are to judge from the evidence given to commissions and parliamentary committees. The general conditions under which commercial specialism evolves may be taken to be a moderately limited range of products which do not present many varieties, and the qualities of which can be judged generally on inspection. In such circumstances private markets need not be built up, as they must be, for instance, for a new brand of soap which claims some subtle superiority to all others. Soaps under present conditions must be marketed by their producers. Broadly stated, if there be little competition as to substitutes, though there may be much as to price in relation to quality, commercial functions may specialize. On the whole this is the case in the cotton industry; in so far as it is not and firms produce specialities, they undertake much of the marketing work themselves.

The advantages of commercial specialism are numerous. Firstly it allows of differentiation of industrial processes, and this, of necessity, is accompanied by increasing returns. When weaving dissociates from spinning, both the number of looms in each business and the number of spindles in each business tend to increase; more division of labour is therefore secured, and lower costs of production are reached, and there is a further gain because producers concentrate their attention upon a smaller range of work. Again when producers are freed entirely, or to some extent, from commercial worries, they can attain a higher level of efficiency at the industrial task of mill organization, and a more perfect accommodation of capacity to function will be brought about. If the business unit is (aA[alpha]), a particular person may retain his place in the market by reason of his excellence at the work a or [alpha], though as works organizer (i.e. at the performances of function A) he may be incompetent. The heads of businesses will succeed according to their average capacities at the three tasks a, A and [alpha], and there is no guarantee, therefore, that any one of these tasks will be performed with the highest attainable efficiency in our present somewhat immobile economic system. But if the three functions are separated there is more certainty of a person's success in the performance of each determining his continued discharge of it. The problems that arise when specialized markets become very highly developed are dealt with in the article COTTON: MARKETING AND SUPPLY.

Operatives in various processes.

The distribution of cotton operatives among the chief centres has
already been shown, but their distribution between processes has yet
to be considered, and the proportions of different ages and sexes from
time to time, together with the total. With such statistical material
as is available relating to supplies of labour we may set forth also
the official returns made of the quantity of machinery at work from
time to time. It hardly need be pointed out that the ratio of
machinery to operatives roughly measures the efficiency of labour,
other things being equal.

_Machinery in the United Kingdom (in Thousands)._

+--------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| Years. | Spinning | Doubling | Power- |
| | Spindles. | Spindles. | Looms. |
+--------+-----------+-----------+--------+
| 1874 | 37,516 | 4366 | 463 |
| 1878 | 39,528 | 4679 | 515 |
| 1885 | 40,120 | 4228 | 561 |
| 1890 | 40,512 | 3993 | 616 |
| 1903 | 43,905 | 3952 | 684 |
+--------+-----------+-----------+--------+

_Operatives employed in the Cotton Industry (in Thousands). (From the
Census Returns.*)_ (The figures in italics relate to Married and
Widowed Women.)

+----------------------------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| | 1901. | 1891. | 1881. |
| +-------------+------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| | | England | | England | | England |
| | Lancashire | and Wales |Lancashire.| and Wales |Lancashire.| and Wales |
+----------------------------------------+------+------+------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| | M. | F. | M. | F. | M. | F. | M. | F. | M. | F. | M. | F. |
|Cotton, card and blowing-room processes | 11.4 | 28.7 | 13.8 | 34.0| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| | 10.1 | |12.2 | | | | | | | | | |
|Cotton spinning processes | 49.5 | 19.6 | 64.1 | 28.6| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| | 4.3 | | 6.0 | | | | | | | | | |
|Cotton weaving, warping, &c. | 57.6 |113.5 | 66.1 |130.8| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| | 13.0 | | 15.8 | | | | | | | | | |
|Cotton winding, warping, &c. | 14.8 | 38.6 | 18.3 | 48.9| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| | 38.1 | | 44.4 | | | | | | | | | |
| +------+------+------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----------+
| Total |133.3 | 265.9|162.3 |320.7|178.2|281.8|213.2|332.8|150.7|249.8|185.4|302.4|
| +------+------+------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
|Cotton workers in other processes or | 29.0 | 6.7 | 34.5 | 9.4 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| undefined | 1.8 | | | 2.3 | | | | | | | | |
|Tape, manufacturer dealer | .. | .. | .. | .. | .47| .25| .9 | 1.5| .4 | .24| .7 | 1.2 |
|Thread, manufacturer dealer | .. | .. | .. | .. | .2 | .9 | .6 | 2.1| .1 | .9 | .5 | 1.7 |
|Fustian, manufacturer dealer | .6 | 1.2 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 1.1 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 5.0| 1.7 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 5.2 |
| | .55| | | 1.0 | | | | | | | | |
|Cotton, calico, warehouseman, dealer | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 2.5 | .3 | 3.2 | .38|
+----------------------------------------+------+------+------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
* Census classifications have been altered twice in the period covered by this table.

In Scotland there are less than 15,000 cotton operatives distributed
as follows:--

In Thousands.

Card and blowing-room processes .4
Spinning-room processes 2.1
Winding, warping, &c. 2.7
Weaving, warping, &c. 6.8
Workers in other processes or undefined 2.8
----
Total 14.8

_Operatives employed in Cotton Factories in the United Kingdom and
Percentages of each Class. (From Returns of Factory Inspectors.)_

+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| | 1835.| 1838.| 1847.| 1850.| 1856.| 1862.| 1867.|
+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Male and Female under | | | | | | | |
| 13, or half-timers. | 13.2 | 45.7 | 5.8 | 4.6 | 6.5 | 8.8 | 10.4 |
| Male, 13 to 18 | 12.5 | 16.6 | 11.8 | 11.2 | 10.3 | 9.1 | 8.6 |
| Male, over 18 | 26.4 | 24.9 | 27.1 | 28.7 | 27.4 | 26.4 | 26.0 |
| Female, over 13 | 47.9 | 53.8 | 55.3 | 55.5 | 55.8 | 55.7 | 55.0 |
+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total number of | | | | | | | |
| Cotton Operatives |218,000|259,500|316,400|331,000|379,300|451,600|401,100|
+=======================+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+
| | 1870.| 1874.| 1878.| 1885.| 1890.| 1895.| 1901.|
+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Male and Female under | | | | | | | |
| 13, or half-timers. | 9.6 | 14.0 | 12.8 | 9.9 | 9.1 | 5.8 | 4.1 |
| Male, 13 to 18 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 7.2 | 7.9 | 8.2 | 7.9 | 7.0 |
| Male, over 18 | 26.0 | 24.1 | 25.3 | 26.4 | 26.9 | 27.6 | 27.8 |
| Female, over 13 | 55.9 | 53.9 | 54.7 | 55.8 | 55.8 | 58.7 | 61.1 |
+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total number of | | | | | | | |
| Cotton Operatives |450,100|479,600|483,000|504,100|528,800|538,900|513,000|
+-----------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

_Number of Operatives (in Thousands) engaged in Spinning,
Manufacturing and Subsidiary Processes (excluding Lace-making, but
including the Fustian Manufacture). (From Census Returns.)_

+------+------------------------+------------------------+------------------------+
| | Males. | Females. | Males and Females. |
+------+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+
| |Under| |Over | All |Under| |Over | All |Under| |Over | All |
| | 15.|15-20.| 20. |Ages.| 15. |15-20.| 20. |Ages.| 15.|15-20.| 20. |Ages.|
+------+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+
| 1881 | 29 | 39 | 121 | 189 | 40 | 81 | 189 | 310 | 69 | 120 | 310 | 500 |
| 1891 | 36 | 45 | 137 | 218 | 50 | 94 | 197 | 341 | 86 | 139 | 334 | 560 |
| 1901 | 24 | 36 | 139 | 199 | 36 | 92 | 207 | 335 | 60 | 128 | 346 | 535 |
+------+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+

The fact that the branches of work covered by the figures are not
identical explains discrepancies between this and the previous table.

_Number of Operatives engaged in the Cotton Industry (Processes
being distinguished and Ages and Sex). (From Special Returns made by
Factory Inspectors.)_

+------------+-------------------------+--------------------------+----------+
| | Males in Thousands. | Females in Thousands. | |
| +-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+--------+ Total in |
| | Half- | Under |18 and | Half- | Under | 18 and |Thousands.|
| |timers.| 18. | over. |timers.| 18. | over. | |
+------------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+--------+----------+
| | | |Spinning and Preparatory Processes| |
|1896 | 5.58 | 22.24 | 71.44 | 4.40 | 30.12 | 78.96 | 212 |
|1898-1899* | 5.42 | 21.57 | 71.37 | 3.86 | 30.44 | 77.64 | 210 |
|1901 | 4.98 | 21.10 | 68.98 | 3.10 | 30.98 | 81.68 | 211 |
| | | |Weaving and Preparatory Processes | |
|1896 | 7.54 | 18.79 | 75.81 | 11.87 | 49.19 | 151.34 | 315 |
|1898-1899* | 6.21 | 17.29 | 72.74 | 10.38 | 48.38 | 150.99 | 306 |
|1901 | 4.72 | 14.86 | 73.81 | 8.0 | 45.66 | 155.03 | 302 |
+------------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+--------+----------+
* Average for 1898 and 1899.

The figures in this table are not quite complete except for 1901; the
relations between the changes shown for each class should nevertheless
be accurately represented.

_Index Numbers of Money, Wages and Prices._

+-------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| |1840.|1855.|1860.|1866.|1870.|1874.|1877.|1880.|1883.|1886.|1891.| 1902.|
+-------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|Cotton operatives. | 50 | 54 | 64 | 74 | 74 | 90 | 90 | 85 | 90 | 93 | 100 |105 |
|Average wages for | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| eight trades | 61 | 61 | 73 | 81 | 83 | 97 | 94 | 89 | 92 | 90 | 100 |108.7*|
|Sauerbeck's | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| index number | 103 | 73 | 99 | 102 | 96 | 102 | 94 | 88 | 82 | 69 | 72 | 69 |
|Average price of | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| wheat per quarter| 66/4| 40/3| 53/3|49/11|46/11| 55/9| 56/9| 44/4| 41/7| 31/-| 37/-|28/1 |
+-------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
* Average for a slightly different group.

_Weekly Wages in the Manchester and District Cotton Trade._

+--------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| |1834.|1836.|1839.|1841.|1849.|1850.|1859.|1860.|1870.|1877.|1882.|1883.|1886.|
+--------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| |s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|s. d.|
|Spinners' average |23 4 |23 11|22 1 |22 0 |21 7 |20 5 |24 1 |23 2 |27 8 |34 4 |31 6 |32 4 |35 7 |
|Big piecers' average|11 0 | 9 3 | 8 6 | 8 8 | 8 6 |13 0 |10 0 |10 0 |11 0 |12 4 |16 0 |16 0 |13 7 |
|Weavers' average |11 0 |10 2 | 9 6 | 9 6 |10 6 |10 3 |11 2 |10 8 |12 2 |15 1 |15 6 |15 0 |13 3 |
+--------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

The most noticeable features of these tables are the decrease in the
proportion of children employed and the steady increase in the number
of operatives as a whole until recent years. The contraction of the
body of operatives of late years seems to have occurred primarily
among children and young persons (where the first check would
naturally be looked for), and secondarily among adult males. If
allowance be made for the smaller value of children as compared with
adults, and the census results be taken, it is not evident that there
has been any diminution in the amount of labour-power; and if the
factory inspectors' returns be accepted, the falling off in the number
of operatives cannot be proved to have taken place in either of the
chief branches of the industry at so rapid a rate as to have
occasioned the enforced dismissal of any hands. An industry which was
not recruited at all would have dwindled at a greater rate. At least
it may be inferred from these figures, when taken in conjunction with
the large increase in spindles and looms, that the output per head has
considerably advanced in spite of the rise in the average quality of
both yarns and fabrics produced. This rise in the value per unit of
the output accounts to some extent for the fact that wages have not
been adversely affected of late.

Wages and piece-rate lists.

Mr A. L. Bowley has calculated index numbers of wages for the leading
trades, including the manufacture of cotton. Those for the cotton
industry are given below, together with averages for cotton and wool
workers, the building trades, mining, workers in iron, sailors,
compositors and agriculturists (England), the numbers in each class
being allowed for in the average. Side by side with these figures,
Sauerbeck's index numbers of general wholesale prices are given,
together with the average prices of wheat per quarter.

It must be remembered that the figures given above for cotton workers
and average wages for eight trades do not measure the differences
between each, but only the differences between the movements of each.
Actual average money wages in the cotton industry have probably been
approximately those stated in the second table beneath, but as these
figures are culled from various sources they must not be taken to
indicate fluctuations.[42]

The wage of fine spinners exceeds the average wage of spinners by
percentages varying from about 25 to 35. In the above figures the
earnings of three classes of spinners are averaged.

The highest wages are earned by mule-spinners (who are all males);
their assistants, known as piecers, are badly paid. Persons can easily
be found, however, to work as piecers, because they hope ultimately to
become "minders," i.e. mule-spinners in charge of mules. The division
of the total wage paid on a pair of mules between the minder and the
piecers is largely the result of the policy of the spinners' trade
union. Almost without exception in Lancashire one minder takes charge
of a pair of mules with two or three assistants according to the
amount of work to be done. Among the weavers there is no rule as to
the number of assistants to full weavers (who are both male and
female), or as to the number of looms managed by a weaver, but the
proportion of assistants is much less than in the spinning branches,
perhaps because of the inferior strength of the weavers' unions. For
the calculation of wages piece-rate lists are universally employed as
regards the payment of full weavers and spinners; some piecers get a
definite share of the total wage thus assigned to a pair of mules,
while others are paid a fixed weekly amount. Many ring-spinners are
now paid also by piece-rate lists, and all other operatives are almost
universally so paid, except, as a rule, the hands in the blowing-room
and on the carding-machines. Spinning and weaving lists are most
complicated; allowances are made in them for most incidents beyond the
operatives' control, by which the amount of the wage might be
affected. Still, however, they could not cover all circumstances, and
much is left to the manner of their application and private
arrangement. They should be regarded as giving the basis, rather than
as actually settling, the wage in all cases. The history of lists
stretches back to the first quarter of the 19th century as regards
spinners, and to about the middle of the century generally as regards
weavers, though a weaving list agreed to by eleven masters was drawn
up as early as 1834. There are still many different district lists in
use, but the favourite spinning lists are those of Oldham and Bolton,
and the weaving list most generally employed is that known as the
"Uniform List," which is a compromise between the lists of Blackburn,
Preston and Burnley. Under the "Particulars Clause," first included in
a Factory Act in 1891 and given extended application in 1895, the
particulars required for the calculation of wages must be rendered by
the employer. As in spinning there used to be doubts about the
quantity of work done, the "indicator," which measures the length of
yarn spun, is coming into general use under pressure from the
operatives. We ought to observe here that the Oldham Spinning list
differs from all others in that its basis is an agreed normal
time-wage for different kinds of work on which piece-rates are
reckoned. But in effect understandings as to the level of normal
time-wages are the real basis everywhere. If the average wages in a
particular mill are lower than elsewhere for reasons not connected
with the quality of labour (e.g. because of antiquated machinery or
the low quality of the cotton used), the men demand "allowances" to
raise their wages to the normal level. Advances and reductions are
made on the lists, and under the Brooklands Agreement, entered into by
masters and men in the cotton spinning industry in 1893, advances and
reductions in future must not exceed 5% or succeed one another by a
shorter period than twelve months. The changes as a rule now are 5% or
2-1/2%. In all branches of the cotton industry it is usual for a
conference to take place between the interested parties before a
strike breaks out, on the demand of one or other for an advance or
reduction.

Trade Unions.

Organization among the workers in the cotton industry is remarkably
thorough. Almost all spinners are members of trade unions, and though
the weavers are not so strongly united, the bulk of them are
organized. The piecers are admitted as members of piecers'
associations, connected with the spinners' associations and controlled
by them. Attempts to form independent piecers' unions have failed.
Weavers' assistants are included in the weavers' unions, which may be
joined in different classes, the benefits connected with which vary
with the amounts paid. One subscription only, however, is imposed by
each branch spinners' association, but in all branches it is not the
same, though every branch pays the same per member to the
amalgamation. All the trade unions of the chief workers in the cotton
industry are federated in the four societies: (1) the Amalgamated
Association of Operative Cotton Spinners (created in 1853 and reformed
in 1870), (2) the Northern Counties Amalgamated Association of Weavers
(founded 1884), (3) the Amalgamated Association of Card and
Blowing-room Operatives (established 1886), and (4) the Amalgamated
Association of Power-loom Overlookers (founded 1884). These were not,
however, the first attempts at federation, and the term "federation"
must not be taken in any strict sense. The distribution of power
between the central authority and the local Societies varies, but in
some cases, for instance among the spinners, the local societies
approximate as closely to the status of mere branches, as to that of
independent units federated for limited objects. We ought also to
mention the societies of warp-dressers and warpers, tape-sizers and
cloth-workers and warehousemen. There is no one federation of all
cotton-workers, but the United Textile Factory Workers has been
periodically called into being to press the matter of factory
legislation, and international textile congresses are occasionally
held by the operatives of different countries.

As to employers, four extensive associations include almost all the
organization among them, two concerned chiefly with spinning and two
with weaving. The former two are the Federation of Master Cotton
Spinners' Associations with local associations and including
21,000,000 spindles, and the Bolton Master Cotton Spinners'
Association with 7,000,000 spindles; the latter two are the North and
North-East Lancashire Spinners' and Manufacturers' Association,
covering about 3,000,000 spindles in addition to a large section of
the looms of Lancashire, and the United Cotton Manufacturers'
Association.[43]

Factory Acts.

Factory legislation began in the cotton industry, and in no industry
is it now more developed. The first acts were those of 1802 and 1819,
both of which applied only to cotton-mills, and the former of which
related only to parish apprentices. The first really important measure
was that of 1833, which curtailed the abuse of child-labour, enforced
some education and provided for factory inspectors, of whom there were
at first only four. The next act of importance, that of 1844, was
chiefly remarkable for its inclusion of all women among young persons.
The proportion of women, young persons and children engaged in the
cotton industry is so high, that most regulations affecting them, e.g.
those relating to the hours of labour, must practically be extended to
all cotton operatives. This act killed night work for "young persons,"
and children were not allowed to work at night. The year 1847 saw the
introduction of what was known as the Ten Hours Act--after the 1st of
May 1848 the hours of young persons (women included) and children were
not to exceed ten a day and fifty-eight a week. A further limitation
of hours to 56-1/2 a week was secured in 1874, and this was cut down
by another hour (the concession of the 12 o'clock Saturday) in 1901.
"Young persons" now includes all who are not half-timers and have not
attained the age of eighteen, and all women. The rules as regards the
employment of children, which have steadily improved, are at present
as follows. No child under twelve may be employed. On attaining the
age of thirteen the child may become a full-timer if he has obtained
the prescribed educational certificate (i.e. fifth standard attainment
or three hundred attendances each year for five consecutive years).
Failing this he must wait till he is fourteen before he can be
employed full time. Half-timers may be employed either (a) on
alternate days, which must not be the same days in two successive
weeks, or (b) in morning and afternoon sets. In the case of
arrangement (a), the child when at work may be employed during the
same period as a young person or woman, which in Lancashire is almost
universally from 6 to 6 with two hours for meals.[44] In the case of
arrangement (b), which is the system generally adopted in Lancashire,
a half-timer in the morning set works from 6 to 12.30, with half an
hour for breakfast, and in the afternoon from 1.30 to 6 except on
Saturdays, when the hours are from 6 till 11.30 for a manufacturing
operative, or till 12 for other work, for instance, cleaning. The
child must not work two consecutive weeks in the same set (that is, in
mornings or afternoons), nor on two successive Saturdays, nor on
Saturday at all if during any other day of the same week the period of
employment has exceeded 5-1/2 hours (i.e. a child in the morning set
does not work on the Saturday). Other important features of factory
legislation relate to the fencing of dangerous machinery and its
cleaning when in motion (the regulations being strictest in the case
of children and most lax in the case of male adults), and conditions
of health, including the amount of steaming allowed, which was first
regulated by the Cotton Cloth Factories Act of 1889.

The Cotton Industry outside England.

A brief survey will now be made of the cotton industry in parts of the globe other than the British Isles, and as a prelude the following broad estimates of the numbers of spindles and looms in the chief national seats of the cotton industry may be put forward.[45] The table is further supplemented by other figures[46] for the number of spindles at different times in the United Kingdom, the United States and the continent; and finally we may add the figures of cotton consumed.

The different average fineness of counts spun in different places must be borne in mind when the consumption of each district at the same time is being considered, but the relations between the amounts consumed in the contrasted districts in the two periods would not be affected much by this difference.

+-----------------+--------------+----------+-------------+
| | Estimated | Million | Thousand |
| | Population | Spinning | Power-Looms |
| | in 1902. | Spindles | about 1906. |
| | In Millions. | in 1909. | |
+-----------------+--------------+----------+-------------+
| United Kingdom. | 42 | 53.5 | 700 |
| United States | 79 | 27.8 | 550 |
| Germany | 58 | 9.8 | 215 |
| France | 39 | 6.8 | 110 |
| Russia | 139 | 7.8 | 150 |
| India | 294(1901) | 5.8 | 45 |
| Austria | 26.7 | 4.2 | 80 |
| Spain | 18.6(1900) | 1.9 | 69 |
| Italy | 33 | 4.0 | 100 |
| Switzerland | 3.4 | 1.5 | 30 |
| Japan | 46 | 1.7 | .. |
| Belgium | .. | 1.2 | .. |
+-----------------+--------------+----------+-------------+

_Cotton Spindles (including Doubling Spindles) in Millions._